J.C. v. Department of Children & Family Services

District Court of Appeal of Florida

J.C. v. Department of Children & Family Services

26 So. 3d 665, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 523, 2010 WL 289175

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 27, 2010

Docket3D09-2337, 3D09-2164

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 26 So. 3d 665 (J.C. v. Department of Children & Family Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

J.C. v. Department of Children & Family Services, 26 So. 3d 665, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 523, 2010 WL 289175 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

J.C., the mother of three-year-old G.C. and eighteen-month-old J.C., and H.C., the father of G.C., 1 appeal from final judgments terminating their parental rights to those children. Although there are several other procedural and substantive issues which give us pause as to the legal sufficiency of the proceedings below, we reverse the judgments and remand for further proceedings on the fundamental ground that there was no showing of any statutory basis justifying that drastic remedy as to either child or either parent. With the immaterial distinction that the parents’ alleged inadequacies arose from drug use, rather than, as in this case, mental illness, the facts of the recent case of In re S.F., 22 So.3d 650 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), are almost identical. Most importantly, as in S.F., there was no showing, as required by the only even arguably applicable provision, section 39.806(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2008), that “ ‘continued interaction with the parent threatens the life, safety, or health of the child, and ... that this threat cannot be remedied by the provision of services.’ ” In re S.F., 22 So.3d at 653 (quoting T.H. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 979 So.2d 1075, 1082 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)). See also C.C. v. Dep’t of *666 Children & Family Servs., 812 So.2d 520 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

Reversed and remanded.

1

. H.C. is not the biological father of J.C. (that person’s identity is unknown), and was not married to the mother.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

J.C., the mother of three-year-old G.C. and eighteen-month-old J.C., and H.C., the father of G.C., 1 appeal from final judgments terminating their parental rights to those children. Although there are several other procedural and substantive issues which give us pause as to the legal sufficiency of the proceedings below, we reverse the judgments and remand for further proceedings on the fundamental ground that there was no showing of any statutory basis justifying that drastic remedy as to either child or either parent. With the immaterial distinction that the parents’ alleged inadequacies arose from drug use, rather than, as in this case, mental illness, the facts of the recent case of In re S.F., 22 So.3d 650 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), are almost identical. Most importantly, as in S.F., there was no showing, as required by the only even arguably applicable provision, section 39.806(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2008), that “ ‘continued interaction with the parent threatens the life, safety, or health of the child, and ... that this threat cannot be remedied by the provision of services.’ ” In re S.F., 22 So.3d at 653 (quoting T.H. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 979 So.2d 1075, 1082 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)). See also C.C. v. Dep’t of *666 Children & Family Servs., 812 So.2d 520 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

Reversed and remanded.

1

. H.C. is not the biological father of J.C. (that person’s identity is unknown), and was not married to the mother.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 So. 3d 665, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 523, 2010 WL 289175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jc-v-department-of-children-family-services-fladistctapp-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack